Transcript Opening Remark and Workshop Charge

Charge to the Internal MEIC Review
September 15-16, 2010
Andrew Hutton
Review 09/2010
Page 1
EICAC
• EICAC is a joint BNL-JLab Advisory Committee on Electron
Ion Colliders
• EICAC provides input to BNL and JLab managements
on the status of the two EIC designs
• E-RHIC at BNL
• MEIC at JLab
• At the last EICAC Review in November 2009, the reviewers
stated:
• “the highest R&D priority for JLab should be the design,
even if that activity is not strictly considered R&D, and
resources need to be made available to do the work”
Review 09/2010
Page 2
Some EICAC Reviewer Comments on MEIC
• The committee was presented with an argument for the figure-8 layout.
Otherwise design work appears to have emphasized the electron ring. In
deriving a pre-conceptual lattice, work was done on chromaticity correction,
both linear and non-linear
• However, even on the electron ring the dynamic aperture was not shown to
the EICAC, and beam-beam work remains to be done
• There was almost nothing shown for hadrons, where JLab will need to
design both the source and the rings
• In light of the level of the maturity of the design, it is very difficult to assess
the credibility of the performance, which will need to be better in terms of
bunch length, β*, etc., than any existing accelerator
• A number of cooling systems will be needed, some of which will be beyond
the state of the art
• it is difficult for EICAC (and the designers) to make credible statements of
how all of these will work together without knowing the fundamental machine
design
Review 09/2010
Page 3
Reason for this Internal Review
• Since the EICAC Review, we have focused on developing a
credible design
• What we really need now is input on which areas of the
design are weak (or worse) so that we can rework the
design before a full-blown EICAC review in (we think)
November-December 2010
• We do not need a full report, but would like written input on
problems so we make sure we fix the correct problem(s)
Review 09/2010
Page 4
Charge for MEIC Review
• Evaluate the present status of the MEIC design
• Is the basis for the design credible?
• Are there things that are missing?
• Are there concepts which need more work?
• Are there any concepts that we could incorporate
• before the next EICAC Review?
• later?
• Are the proposed R&D plans
• Reasonable?
• Properly prioritized?
• Any other suggestions?
Review 09/2010
Page 5